The presidential campaign will have experienced many twists and turns. The latest came… from the editorial staff of Washington Post, who declared not to support any candidate in the November 5 election, contrary to his usual practice. William Lewis, its general director, announced in an online post that the prestigious daily, famous for revealing Watergate, would also abstain in future elections. A decision which sparked numerous reactions from readers, most of them outraged.
In the ranks of Washington Postthe pill is no longer working for certain journalists. The columnist Ruth Marcus considers that it is a “bad choice arriving at the worst possible time”, eleven days before the election. “I have never been as disappointed with the newspaper as I am today, after the tragic error that was made in not supporting a candidate in the presidential election,” she wrote. The announcement also shook the journalists’ union, which accused the owner, Jeff Bezos, of blocking support for Kamala Harris.
A source close to the newspaper’s management assured that the decision had been taken by the daily itself and that it was “wrong” to attribute it to its owner. “We are aware that this decision will give rise to many interpretations, that it will be seen as implicit support for one of the candidates, or the rejection of another, or as an avoidance of our responsibilities”, writes William Lewis , as polls put Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris and former Republican President Donald Trump neck and neck.
The Post for Democrats: unfailing support since 2008
The astonishment is all the greater since the major American daily, owned by the founder of Amazon since 2013, had supported Democratic candidates during the presidential elections of 2008, 2012, 2016 and 2020. “The Post supported a candidate for president in each election since 1992, after not choosing any candidate in the 1988 election”, underlines the American site Politico. The director general thus described Friday’s decision as a “return to basics”, arguing that the Washington Post had, for example, refrained from calling for a vote for either candidate in 1960, before the election won by John F. Kennedy.
This twist comes shortly after the refusal of the owner of another major American daily, the Los Angeles Timesto validate the decision of the newspaper’s editorial committee which wanted to support Kamala Harris. “Just like Bezos, (the owner since 2018) Soon-Shiong – whose fortune comes from the heavily regulated pharmaceutical industry – has non-journalistic reasons to worry about a war with the federal government” , criticizes the site Politico, taken up by International Mail. Billionaire Soon-Shiong assured X: “With this clear and non-partisan information, our readers could decide who would be worthy of being president for the next four years.”
Kamala Harris, the only “patriotic choice” for the New York Times
Friday, the New York Postan ultra-conservative tabloid owned by tycoon Rupert Murdoch, for its part called for people to vote for the Republican candidate. “Donald Trump is the right choice”, assures the daily, listing the priorities for the future president of the United States: “a secure border”, “safe cities”, “a thriving economy for all based on low taxation and regulations”, the authority of parents and an America “respected on the international scene”…
On September 30, the editorial board of the prestigious New York Times had given his support to the Democratic vice-president, assuring that Kamala Harris was the only “patriotic choice”, and adding that it was “difficult to imagine a candidate more unworthy of the presidency of the United States than Donald Trump”. THE Boston Globe and the Philadelphia Inquirerbased in the hotly contested state of Pennsylvania, did the same. “The choice is clear and obvious. Vice President Kamala Harris wants to help all Americans. Donald Trump wants to help himself. That’s why The Philadelphia Inquirer supports Kamala Devi Harris as the 47th President of the United States,” the editorial board quoted in an article published Friday, October 25.
These successive announcements come in a campaign which has seen the big names of the American press lose their influence with voters as well as with the candidates themselves, whose attention is increasingly focused on other media such as podcasts. or TikTok. Still, the absence of support from such a reputable newspaper is not the best for Kamala Harris, already in difficulty with Hispanic and African-American electorates.